Anyone shoot film still?

[dr_zero]

Is it hard to find film where you live?

When I used to live in bigger cities it was nothing to go to a camera shop and get what you needed, then I moved to a smaller town and your choices were either wal mart or a drug store.
The wal mart and the drug store used to have a OK selection of film but now I cant get B&W film at all or even find iso 800 most of the time let alone anything higher!

[AndrewWG]

Is it hard to find film where you live?

When I used to live in bigger cities it was nothing to go to a camera shop and get what you needed, then I moved to a smaller town and your choices were either wal mart or a drug store.
The wal mart and the drug store used to have a OK selection of film but now I cant get B&W film at all or even find iso 800 most of the time let alone anything higher!

I couldn't begin to tell you if there is film available around here or not. It had been a LONG time since I looked. WalMart used to have a decent selection, but I usually went to the photo shop a few towns over to get it. I may have been off base on this, but I thought their stuff would be fresher and better. They since went out of business.

[Independence1776]

The wal mart and the drug store used to have a OK selection of film but now I cant get B&W film at all or even find iso 800 most of the time let alone anything higher!

The Wal-Mart I sometimes go to has both B&W and ISO 800 film. It's more of a problem for me to find ISO 200 there. Maybe you could have them special order what you need, or if they won't/can't, what about online somewhere?

[dr_zero]

The Wal-Mart I sometimes go to has both B&W and ISO 800 film. It's more of a problem for me to find ISO 200 there. Maybe you could have them special order what you need, or if they won't/can't, what about online somewhere?

Wow! that is unusual! We have TONS of 200 and not all Kodak either some Fuji also!

Before the remodel we had a section of like cubby holes with all types of film now one little section with one space for 400 and one for 800 Fuji no Kodak over 400 and most is 200

[Shutterbug]

Fortunately I live just a few miles from an actual family owned camera store. They still carry much print film AND varieties of slide film too! :thumbsup2

[MICKEY88]

I may have been off base on this, but I thought their stuff would be fresher and better. They since went out of business.


depends on the turnover rate of their film, actually with film, fresher isn't neccessarily better..

[dr_zero]

Fortunately I live just a few miles from an actual family owned camera store. They still carry much print film AND varieties of slide film too! :thumbsup2

SLIDE!
:faint: :faint: :faint: :faint: :faint: :faint: :faint: :faint: :faint: :faint: :faint: :faint: :faint: :faint:

[The Grays]

I heard last week that many of the box stores are going to cut back on the variety of film they carry and will sell more 3 and 4 packs of film and cut most of the single rolls of film.

We cut back on the film we carried when I had a large amout go out of date and had to eat it. I carry b&w for the local schools, keep a had full of slide film in the fridge, and an assortment of print film.

[dr_zero]

Many moons ago when pic & save was still around I bought about half a shipper of 12 exposure Polaroid film in 200-400 iso.
That was some of the best film was not grainy and was cheap! for a student that was a big plus +.

Never saw it again till one day in wal mart they had some but had changed it was very brown in color and thin had a roll snap on me one time.

I wish you could still get film in other than 24 and 36 other than loading your own but like I said its getting to be around here a blessing if you can find any film. Arg!

[Anewman]

99 cent store has film, never really checked what kind it was.

[DixieDolphin]

Most of my favorite 'real' camera stores still carry a wide variety of 35mm color & b/w negative film & slide film, along with medium & large formats as well.

But other places? I never really bought film from drug stores (except in an emergency) and I never even bothered with the ridiculously overpriced stuff at Ritz (bleh)... but now neither of them carry much in the way of film anymore. It's a shame.

If I need a specific type of film these days, it's off to Adorama or BHPhoto!

=)

[dr_zero]

Orlando had a good selection of stores last time I was down alot of tourist shops though also, up here there is nothing even close to a camera shop anymore.

Mail order has pretty much shut down most mom and pop places.

[DixieDolphin]

I never go in those tourist camera stores. All junk, overpriced. And I don't always trust their sources, I'm wary of places that might try to pass off grey market to the unsuspecting.

The two best places for camera supplies in Orlando are Colonial Photo & Hobby on the corner of SR50/Mills Ave and Harmon Photo on the corner of Orange/Virginia. Both are near Downtown and far from the touristy areas of town. They're both awesome, though. Great folks and great selection. Colonial is a little more expensive than Harmon, but they are larger and have more stuff on hand most of the time.

[dr_zero]

I never go in those tourist camera stores. All junk, overpriced. And I don't always trust their sources, I'm wary of places that might try to pass off grey market to the unsuspecting.

The two best places for camera supplies in Orlando are Colonial Photo & Hobby on the corner of SR50/Mills Ave and Harmon Photo on the corner of Orange/Virginia. Both are near Downtown and far from the touristy areas of town. They're both awesome, though. Great folks and great selection. Colonial is a little more expensive than Harmon, but they are larger and have more stuff on hand most of the time.

I will have to check them out!

Yeah we went to sea world awhile back and I wandered into a couple of the tourist places just to see if things had changed and it hadn't was still bad LOL!

There used to be a great shop in Jacksonville a huge store that ran the gambit from SLR to like Studio TV Cameras but just could not make it.
Was a wealth of information also you could learn more hangin out in there than they ever taught in school LOL.

[DixieDolphin]

Yeah, good camera shops are great for learning! Some of the best tips I got on my photography was from the guy who did my processing at a little bitty store in Melbourne, FL years ago. Helped me out a ton!

BTW... info on those two stores here in O-town:

http://www.colonialphotohobby.com/

http://www.harmonphoto.com/

=)

[The Grays]

I wish you could still get film in other than 24 and 36 other than loading your own but like I said its getting to be around here a blessing if you can find any film. Arg!

You can still get it, it is made. The cost of it is not much cheeper that 24 exposures, and in some cases it is more expensive than 24. I have one customer who always want 12 exposures so I stock it for her.

[PixieDust32]

I get mine from Wal Mart, we have a couple close by, they have all kinds, I always buy 800 and black and white every once in a while, but I have no problem. I love it there, because we can order online and pick-up/pay at the store, we do cards, gifts, everything in one spot.

[AndrewWG]

depends on the turnover rate of their film, actually with film, fresher isn't neccessarily better..

I always was told that it was. Why is is not necessarily better? Back when I shot film, I didn't know anything about photography. I just set my Rebel to AUTO and shot away. I figured that if the film was old, my pics would be even worse than they already were... :lmao:

[MICKEY88]

I always was told that it was. Why is is not necessarily better? Back when I shot film, I didn't know anything about photography. I just set my Rebel to AUTO and shot away. I figured that if the film was old, my pics would be even worse than they already were... :lmao:

film like you will find at walmart is made with a life of about 2 years, thruout that time the chemicals change, it is at it's prime in the middle of the 2 years, so film with a date that indicates it's at the beginning of the 2 years will be slightly off colorwise, just as film near the end of the 2 years will be..

is it a very noticeable difference, that depends on how closely you monitor your pics,

pro films such as VPS are made such that they are at their prime when they leave the factory, that is why you can only find it at camera shops, and it is refrigerated, that keeps the chemicals from shifting so to speak...

that is why professionals that use these films either have a dedicated refrigerator at home, or the family refrigerator is usually lacking either the butter compartment or the egg holders on the door, these have become the film holders.LOL

[handicap18]

I've seen film at all the Wal-Mart's around me as well as Walgreen's, Rite Aid and CVS. Never noticed if Target carries it or not. I've also noticed film in all the big super markets around me (Shaw's, Stop & Shop, Roche Bros, Market Basket). I bought some B&W film this past fall in Shaw's Super Market.

There are 3 or 4 camera shops in my general area and they all have film. Including 1 with a huge selection.

There are very few places that develop B&W film though. Even the "BIG" camera shop in the Greater Boston area sends B&W film out to be developed. They don't do it in house any longer.

[drcandon]

It is probably not going to help you much since this is a Canadian retailer but the huge and I do mean huge camera supply store in Toronto called Henry's has every type of film and their shipping and handling rates are resonable. I know they ship to the US as well since you can get quotes in US and Canuck bucks.

Do a google search for Henry's camera and you will get them..

Nice thing about them is they are a pro shop as well and handle all formats in all ISO ranges...IF you need it and can't find it anywhere they can get it...

[dr_zero]

I've seen film at all the Wal-Mart's around me as well as Walgreen's, Rite Aid and CVS. Never noticed if Target carries it or not. I've also noticed film in all the big super markets around me (Shaw's, Stop & Shop, Roche Bros, Market Basket). I bought some B&W film this past fall in Shaw's Super Market.

There are 3 or 4 camera shops in my general area and they all have film. Including 1 with a huge selection.

There are very few places that develop B&W film though. Even the "BIG" camera shop in the Greater Boston area sends B&W film out to be developed. They don't do it in house any longer.


We are like the first exit to Florida and you would think we would have a good selection of bathing suits and cameras and all that kind of jazz but sadly no.

Walgreen's around here has a ok selection but is high in comparison.

And no one develops B&W hardly anywhere they send it out and then its not true B&W they run it on a color machine and it has a slight blue cast.

Found one place in Jacksonville that did real B&W developing and that was it.

[0bli0]

i can get it in the city (10 minute train ride from office) - all the film types that i shoot (fuji astia & velvia, kodak portra and t64, ilford pan f+, and rollei retro 100/400) in both 120 and 35mm (except the rollei only in 35mm...). i can only buy fuji fortia in japan.
mostly i now order my film from ebay or pick it up when i'm in japan as it's about 1/4 the price compared to buying locally. i just brought back 24 rolls of 120 rollei retro 100 and 15 rolls of 120 fuji astia from europe.

[dr_zero]

A friend emailed me about how mad she was that Sams club has quit carrying film! Is this local or have they all?

Wal Mart has cut way way back on theirs and the prices are up! Walgreens has a better selection and a lower price around here.

[ukcatfan]

IMO, film will be relegated to pros and dedicated film enthusiasts in just a few years from now. I would not be surprised if you can only order it online or buy it in actual photo shops in just a few year as well. With less volume in the sales, the prices will probably go up and then shortages will cause even more inflation on the price.

[dr_zero]

IMO, film will be relegated to pros and dedicated film enthusiasts in just a few years from now. I would not be surprised if you can only order it online or buy it in actual photo shops in just a few year as well. With less volume in the sales, the prices will probably go up and then shortages will cause even more inflation on the price.

Sadly I can see that happening also.

There is something about film though that digital just doesnt have, guess I know how people feel about their LP's and Cd's

[Experiment_626]

I sort of wish I still had my N6006. I really don't miss film, and if I had a film camera, I would use it very rarely. I could see using it if I wanted to make a really huge print. If you could still get film like Ektar 25, it would be worth it for those rare instances when I wanted to make an oversize poster. Back in my journalist days, I photographed a high school basketball team for a gigantic poster they wanted to hang in their gym. I new this was going to be made into a print about eight feet wide, so Ektar 25 was the only way to go.

I suspect the day is coming when buying 35mm film will be as much of a niche product as medium format is currently.

SSB

[boBQuincy]

I don't miss film, vinyl LPs, or carburetors. ;)

[MarkBarbieri]

I don't miss film, vinyl LPs, or carburetors. ;)

I'm with you. Nor cassette tapes, VCRs, or CRTs.

[dr_zero]

Digital is nice and has its value but I think it has taken away from photography alot since many people now just shoot whatever and then just make it how they want with the computer.

There was some skill and art that went into taking pictures in the past that is being lost with everything being photoshopped now.

[MarkBarbieri]

I see it differently. You haven't really lost anything. You've just gained additional capabilities. If that makes some people lazy, that's their problem.

You could make a similar argument that word processors have ruined writing because people can fix and adjust things more easily after they have written them.

[dr_zero]

I see it differently. You haven't really lost anything. You've just gained additional capabilities. If that makes some people lazy, that's their problem.

You could make a similar argument that word processors have ruined writing because people can fix and adjust things more easily after they have written them.

I agree I think word processors have ruined writing skills.
If you look at how many people write their penmanship is lacking due to too much typing and spelling is worse when they do not have spell check.

http://www.goodmagazine.com/section/Provocations/stop_teaching_handwriting

I don't think we need to do away with everything analog but we should not replace education and skill with a computer program.

[Anewman]

Digital is nice and has its value but I think it has taken away from photography alot since many people now just shoot whatever and then just make it how they want with the computer.

There was some skill and art that went into taking pictures in the past that is being lost with everything being photoshopped now.


I think using Photoshop well is a skill and an art... but that is just me.

[Ellester]

I'm hoping some of you photo-experts can guide me. I have several old Canon SLR cameras, lenses, and accessories that were my grandfather's. Is there any market for film cameras anymore? I really don't want to just toss them, I'm hoping I can sell them or at least pass them on to someone who would actually use them. I'm more of a point & shoot type of gal! Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!

[frugal_mar]

What exact equipment do you have? Depending on the age of the lenses, they may be compatible with the Canon DSLRs.

You may be able to donate them to your local high school. Many high schools still shoot film. You can also, check with your local camera shop, many have a consignment shelf.

[juligrl]

What exact equipment do you have? Depending on the age of the lenses, they may be compatible with the Canon DSLRs.

You may be able to donate them to your local high school. Many high schools still shoot film. You can also, check with your local camera shop, many have a consignment shelf.

Don't forget local colleges too.

[SueInBoston]

I encourage you to donate them to local high schools, or you can try selling them locally on craigslist. DD is a freshman taking photography and the school does not have enough cameras for everyone. I found her a Canon Rebel G for $50 on Craigslist.

[MarkBarbieri]

The lenses are still useful. If you can find a buyer for the cameras, great.

You might use them as little plant pots. Or maybe give them to a kid to disassemble. That would be interesting.

[Ellester]

What exact equipment do you have? Depending on the age of the lenses, they may be compatible with the Canon DSLRs.

You may be able to donate them to your local high school. Many high schools still shoot film. You can also, check with your local camera shop, many have a consignment shelf.

This is what I have, from a list he wrote. I have no idea what some of the abbreviations are.
Canon A1 w/ Sigma 28-80 FD lens w/ Canon 155A flash
Canon AE-1 w/ Tokina 28-85 FD Lens
Canon Auto-200M-s camera
Lenses:
Canon 50mm FD F1.8
Cannon 28mmFD F2.8
Cannon 70-210 FD F4
Vivitar Auto Ext Tube Set Canon FD
Vivitar 2x Macro ext for Canon FD
Vivitar 2x Canon FDVivitar SL-1/slave
Mini-tripood
Nikon AP-2 panorama head
Spiraton Auto winder AE series
Aetna 52mm CUS
Gossen Luna Pro Meter

I'm pretty sure I have his old Hasselblad as well, I just have to find it. I like the idea of donating to a school. I'll have to look into that. I know the local PS's barely have enough money for books, much less things like cameras!

[thomas998]

I would check school twice before donating... lots of people will just say sure we can use it when in fact they can't and wont so it is really just like tossing them in the dump.

I suspect schools that lack the money to buy camera will be unlikely to afford the film and development of that film. Film is getting more expensive as it becomes more of a niche item.

I would suggest you use the cameras. Some situations just work better on film... it doesn't give you the instant gratification of digital but you get a better dynamic range.

[Experiment_626]

Or maybe give them to a kid to disassemble. That would be interesting.Honestly, I wish I had an old film SLR that nobody wanted so I could take it apart. I'll bet it would be interesting.

SSB

[DebºoºS]

I agree if you can donate or give to an interested teen! My DS learned a lot about photography by using my old manual Nikons and lenses. He also learned how to process and print with my darkroom setup. He and his friends took some great pics of the moon with a manual Nikon mounted on our Celestron telescope. Then they processed and printed blow-ups in B&W.
Cameras and musical instruments can be passed on for a long time.

[CEK40]

Since reading the earlier post "Mama don't take my Kodachrome away", this has gotten me wondering, how many of you still use film? When or in what specific situtations and what equipment do you use when using film. Also, do you see a time when film outweighs using digital and why?

[thomas998]

I usually only use kodachrome for outdoor shots of my family, shots of flowers, or shots at Christmas time by the tree. Its pricey to process and takes time that only I am willing to put up with (the wife wants the instant gratification of digital). And mainly because looking at family shots on a viewer just looks so much better than a print... I have a nikon hanging by the door loaded with it so its ready when I get the urge to capture memories... and an old Yashica in the drawer that's only used for flower shots because I have some bellows and lens on it that I never got around to finding in a Nikon mount.

In the end there is a quality to slides that I don't see in prints... I've gotten close to it using photoshop with things like Fred Miranda's Velvia Vision... but it still doesn't quite seem the same.

The digital camera is used 90% of the time, even if the software gets there to reproduce the slide quality I'll still try to use film... if for no other reason that it seems more permanent than bits on a chip.

I think anytime you are in a situation with bright lights and dark shadows, film will win out... but maybe that's going to change if they continue improvements to digital sensors... to me digital is like a big mac and film is like a gourmet burger... they both fill you up, but one is just more satisfying.

[MarkBarbieri]

We were starting to get a film on the bottom of our shower door, but some CLR took care of it.

I haven't touched a roll of film since early 2002. The only thing I miss is getting all of those little containers that are useful for holding small stuff.

[bob100]

I think anytime you are in a situation with bright lights and dark shadows, film will win out...

I have a somewhat opposite view in that I find you can bring out amazing details in a digital photo's shadows and dark areas with photoshop but then I probably never used my Minolta SLR to its full potential because of the cost of film and processing. Once I got an HP digital camera five or six years ago I never used film again. two camera manufactures that bit the dust - but they still work!

[WillCAD]

I switched to digital in 2003, but I still used film in my old SLR for a few year afterward, just for fun, and for night shots that my first digital camera couldn't handle.

Since about 2005, I don't use film at all, and stick strictly with my Canon Digital Rebel 300D.

The only time I would use film these days is if I were on a wilderness trip where I couldn't find a place to charge my camera batteries every couple of days.

[MarkBarbieri]

The only time I would use film these days is if I were on a wilderness trip where I couldn't find a place to charge my camera batteries every couple of days.

I take my digital camera on wilderness trips. I bring along a second battery. Between the two batteries, I can get 2,000 to 2,500 shots. Extra batteries are cheaper and lighter than film.

[gokenin]

Still shot black and white film I dont think that a digital camera gets the same grainy feel that a film camera can for black and white and have shot some color as well. There is something for me at least of not having instant access all the time to your pictures and knowing that you have to stop and think instead of turning into a machine gunner picture taker hoping to get one that is good

[gokenin]

Still shot black and white film I dont think that a digital camera gets the same grainy feel that a film camera can for black and white and have shot some color as well. There is something for me at least of not having instant access all the time to your pictures and knowing that you have to stop and think instead of turning into a machine gunner picture taker hoping to get one that is good

[WillCAD]

Still shot black and white film I dont think that a digital camera gets the same grainy feel that a film camera can for black and white and have shot some color as well. There is something for me at least of not having instant access all the time to your pictures and knowing that you have to stop and think instead of turning into a machine gunner picture taker hoping to get one that is good

Hey, if you want grain, I'll shoot my Digital Rebel at 1600ISO for ya! :rotfl2:

[boBQuincy]

After 30 years of Kodachrome, Ektachrome, Ektar, etc. I said goodbye to film in 2001 when I bought my Canon D30. No regrets, I can see no advantages to film over digital in any way (except for the little canisters, as Mark said). I mean, almost nothing fits in the CF card cases! ;)

As mentioned before, I don't miss carburetors nor vinyl records either but realize that all of these still have their followers. All these differences in equipment and techniques is what makes photography, audio, and cars so much fun!

[gokenin]

:rotfl2: could just be another quirk of us weird pentax users:lmao: have one film slr, thinking of getting a second and would love to get a medium format film camera as well along with my digital cameras

[Andrew Bichard]

I have a 17mm rectilinear lens on a Canon T90, and a good flash with a wide light spread.

A wonderful lens for interior shots and outside shots where you can't get far enough away.

I call it my realtor lens!

I still use from time to time, because I couldn't afford an equivalent lens on a digital SLR.

And those little cannisters save the day when I was travelling Glasgow to London once. The restaurant & bar on the train were closed as it was a Sunday, but I had a bottle 100 proof 15 year old Talisker!!!

Andrew

[DebºoºS]

Yup, as mentioned on the other thread. Right now I'm cooling Velvia 100F in the frig:thumbsup2

I love my D200 DSLR :love:buuuutttt don't take my Kodachrome away:3dglasses

[DebºoºS]

And those little cannisters save the day when I was travelling Glasgow to London once. The restaurant & bar on the train were closed as it was a Sunday, but I had a bottle 100 proof 15 year old Talisker!!!

Andrew

:rotfl2:hooozah!

[Groucho]

:rotfl2: could just be another quirk of us weird pentax users:lmao: have one film slr, thinking of getting a second and would love to get a medium format film camera as well along with my digital cameras
Yeah, you just beat me on that Spotmatic on the other forums. :teeth: I'm not in a huge rush, I still need to finish putting a roll through my H3. It's intimidating not having any lightmeter! I do have my grandfather's ancient GE no-battery lightmeter and plan on learning how to use it one of these days.

I also have a roll of film in my K1000, and want to get some rollfilm to use in my Kodak Junior Six/16 that I recently bought... and would like to get around to build a paper pinhole camera, too.

The coolest thing I've seen in a long time, though, requires 110 film... I bought a few old lenses and a flash a couple days ago off Craigslist, and the guy had (but wasn't selling) a Pentax Auto 110. This is the smallest SLR ever built, and is a fully-featured SLR that used 110 film. There were 6-7 lenses made for it, a teleconverter, full suite of filters and such... it was indescribably tiny! I haven't checked yet but supposedly the focal length equivalent was about 2x 35mm, which would mean a similar film size to a 4/3rds sensor, but this was waaaaaaaaay smaller than any 4/3rds camera. The aperture was actually in the camera and the lenses were like little jewels of engineering, with lens caps the size of nickels! And it was still pretty easy to handle and very easy to manual focus. It was amazing, I definitely have to get one even if I rarely use it. But it is a true pocket SLR and I can see why owners have been clamoring for a digital equivalent. Micro 4/3rds is trying to get there but they're still much larger.

Bob, I think b/w film still beats digital in terms of dynamic range, though that may be shrinking (especially with Fuji's DSLR SuperCCD sensors)... but it is a different "look".

[Boo Bear]

I primarily shoot black and white with my Mamiya RB67 with 220 backing. I did sell out and get a Nikon D300 as my new $$$ maker though because that's what it all starting to come down to... convenience.

[boBQuincy]

Bob, I think b/w film still beats digital in terms of dynamic range, though that may be shrinking (especially with Fuji's DSLR SuperCCD sensors)... but it is a different "look".

Most color negative films probably have a larger dynamic range than most digital sensors as well. But with HDR the sky is the limit! There is no way I could have captured some of the night scenes nearly as well with film as with HDR.

One of the differences is in the way bright values "clip", much in the way that transistor amplifiers "hard clip" vs tubes which "soft clip". Sensors just clip while film gently rolls off the response, giving a much more pleasing transition from almost washed out to completely washed out.

[rst90274]

If they are still available let me know. I'd be interested in purchasing them for my twin daughters. They are taking a film photography class in high school and cameras are not provided.

[spinetnglr]

Another option, if you dont want to donate them or give them away, would be to check with any local auction houses you might have. I work at an auction every Friday and I can tell you in my area old film cameras and lenses bring decent prices. You might get a little more from some place like Craigslist or ebay but then you also have a considerable bit more time wrapped up in things like taking pictures of the items, writing the listing, answering questions of potential bidders, emailing the winning bidder when the auction is over, shipping and/or meeting the buyer to close the deal. With a local auction you drop the things off and are pretty much done. Most of the people doing the buying at auction are people who list on ebay and craisgslist for a living or supplement to their regular job. All you need is two that want the same thing and prices can get out of hand just like they do sometimes on ebay. Almost all auction houses these days have their regular craigslist/ebay buyers who attend every auction. I see it happen almost every week and when auction is over we are lots of times discussing the outrageous price paid for x or y that night. If auction is an option for you check with more than one and ask them their commission rate before consigning. Each one charges differently.

[jann1033]

The lenses are still useful. If you can find a buyer for the cameras, great.

You might use them as little plant pots.. great minds agree this was my first thought as well:lmao::lmao::lmao:

i only have one thing to say about craigslist, be ready for lots of scam if you sell something of value on it.

[Groucho]

You could use them, too. :) I was rather surprised to see, on my last WDW trip, two different Canon AE-1s within five minutes of each other. I did occasionally see film SLRs but it was surprising to see two of a specific model in succession. (I know they were different as one was silver and one was black.)

As far as disassembling... I recently completely took apart my Zeiss 135mm for cleaning and took photos during it, I may post that as a new thread one of these days. My Pentax H3 has a sticky aperture pin reset level (and is pretty redundant since I have a Spotmatic now), I began to try to disassemble it to fix it then got intimidated and put it back together! Lots and lots of tiny little gears and levers in there. It is definitely a machine more than anything else.

[Experiment_626]

A while back, I bought a Nikon N65 as part of a package on eBay. I bought it to get a 50 mm f1.8 lens that was included. I got the whole thing for less than I would have paid for the lens by itself. It was my intention to clean up the camera and remaining gear (a Tamron 28-200 AF lens and a bag) and resell them. However, there doesn't seem to be much of a market for this camera these days. In addition, I cannot in good conscience extoll the virtues of the Tamron lens; I don't know how well it performs optically, but I do know it hunts for focus worse than any other lens I've ever seen.

So, in short, I'm thinking of keeping the N65 for my use, as infrequent as that might be. In addition to the 50mm, I also have an otherwise-unused 28-70 FX-format lens I can use with it.

I haven't shot a frame of film in 10 years. I know various brands and lines of film have vanished from the market in the interim, and there are probably new formulations of others and possibly brand-new varieties that have come into being.

If I shoot any film, I foresee it being in a situation where I might want to make a really large print, so I want the finest grain I can reasonably get. If it doesn't give me an advantage over my D300, I'd go with the latter. I did once shoot a couple of rolls of Ektar 25 (which I know no longer exists). One shot I took was made into a huge poster -- nine feet wide, if I recall -- and I was impressed at how clean it looked even at such a gigantic size. Is there anything out there that approaches those results?

I was even thinking it might be an interesting experiment to shoot film for HDR -- I do have access to a Nikon film scanner.

I don't particularly care whether I shoot negatives or transparencies -- I want what will look best. However, expense is a consideration, as usual.

So what do you guys recommend?

SSB

[elliot]

Hi Experiment!

For film all depend the type of target. You don't find those films on your local walmart, so try a local camera shop or online stores (adorama.com or bhphotovideo.com) this is my list:

1. My favorite--> Fuji Velvia 50 (saturate colors, sharp)

2. Fuji Velvia 100F (a little less saturate than velvia 50, better skin tones)

3. Kodak Ektachrome E100G. (more natural look than fuji velvias, less saturate colors, better for people portraits)


Yo won't regret shoot on film, digital is more convenient and easy workflow but with film is like having a full frame digital DSLR without brake your bank.

Enjoy your shooting!! :thumbsup2

[Experiment_626]

Thanks for the reply. I think I might check out the Ektachrome when the time comes -- how does it compare, in terms of grain, with the Velvia 50?

I'm primarily a landscape/cityscape shooter, so I'm not too concerned about skin tones. However, Velvia's reputation for saturation concerns me a bit. In fact, I often engineer highly-saturated images, so I like the look -- in theory. I'm just concerned that I might lose detail in some colors with the Velvia, especially if I go to HDR with the results of my experiments (and probably 75 percent of what I shoot is HDR these days). I was just thinking that a less-saturated film would give me more room to maneuver in Camera Raw/Photoshop and/or Photomatix.

SSB

[PhotobearSam]

Ektachrome E100G is my fav SLIDE film but the Fujis are so nice in print....I kinda miss film.

[elliot]

Well, you know that film always has grain! for me the Ektachrome E100G have a finer grain than velvia but isn't sharper, I like shoot nature, so I prefer the saturate wild colors that velvia give me. Because kodak has more natural tones, maybe you have more room to experiment with HDR.

Another point if you have concerns for grain when print large format, your best bet is digital (DSLR) which has no grains. But this the unique look of film isn't?

The best bet is try both.

[hjssk8]

Hi all! :wave2: I am a long time lurker with a question regarding film freshness. I bought some 800 speed film from a local shop in summer 2008 with a date of Sept. '08. I used all but two that I got in that time frame. They have been in the fridge since then. Are they still good? I would like to be able to use them since thay are 36 exp. each.

Thanks!:)

[Gdad]

It should be just fine- I bought some that expired in '04 on Ebay a few weeks ago (for $1 a roll) that's been in the fridge and no problems.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2553/3924096065_0afcb7075a.jpg

[hjssk8]

Thanks!:thumbsup2

[Gdad]

So we spent a couple days and stayed over at Disney last weekend. I decided to go light and just take one camera which happened to be 35mm. Anyway- I took 10 rolls of Tri-X 400 speed film along which is B&W but when I got to the Magic Kingdom on Saturday and saw all the Christmas decorations I thought it would be nice to shoot a few rolls of color. So I wandered into the 'Camera Center' on Main Street- sponsored by 'Kodak' by the way- and was pretty surprised to find they had absolutely no 35mm film for sale whatsoever. Nothing at all aside from a little display of disposable film cameras and a few boxes of APS film (eh?) to offer. I know most people don't care but I can't imagine many places where more pictures are being taken every day than Disney World. Seems like it wouldn't kill them to keep a little bit of it around just in case. :confused3

[annnewjerz]

Geez, I could understand not having your film if you were trying to get something a little more "exotic" in The World---but 35mm? I know loads of people who still haven't made the switch to digital, so that's really surprising.

I'm sure you got lots of fantastic shots in B&W anyway and if you are still yearning for the shots in color, something tells me you'll be able to make another trip over between now and then. :thumbsup2

[Groucho]

I see plenty of film SLRs still in use there at WDW. APS film? That's just weird. I would think they'd still have some 35mm... our local grocery store chain still has plenty of it at every checkout, but then, we are the home of Kodak!

Meanwhile, I just got ten rolls of Fujicolor 110 which they just stopped production of, and haven't sold in the US since 2004... mine's dated 10/2009 so it's probably some of the last ever made. I don't expect to find these at WDW. :)

A relative worked for a company that made machines for Kodak and they had tons of film for testing, and through "hand me downs" I've got probably a few dozen rolls of Kodak 35mm in the basement (I should really throw it in the freezer), but unfortunately it's almost all Gold 200/400, only a couple rolls of b/w, which I would much prefer. :(

[xipetotec]

So we spent a couple days and stayed over at Disney last weekend. I decided to go light and just take one camera which happened to be 35mm. Anyway- I took 10 rolls of Tri-X 400 speed film along which is B&W but when I got to the Magic Kingdom on Saturday and saw all the Christmas decorations I thought it would be nice to shoot a few rolls of color. So I wandered into the 'Camera Center' on Main Street- sponsored by 'Kodak' by the way- and was pretty surprised to find they had absolutely no 35mm film for sale whatsoever. Nothing at all aside from a little display of disposable film cameras and a few boxes of APS film (eh?) to offer. I know most people don't care but I can't imagine many places where more pictures are being taken every day than Disney World. Seems like it wouldn't kill them to keep a little bit of it around just in case. :confused3

That IS surprising! Especially a Kodak sponsored spot.

btw, from what I've read, Magic Kingdom IS the most photographed place in the world.

[NateNLogansDad]

What's a "film?" :confused3


:rotfl2:

[boBQuincy]

What's a "film?" :confused3


:rotfl2:

What we get on our teeth when we don't brush often. ;)

I can imagine some young store manager who never even used film looked at the sales chart over the past few years and just didn't see the point in allocating valuable store space for something that shows dwindling sales. Or the purchasing people may not even buy film for WDW anymore.

It is sad in a way although I have not touched film since late 2001, after having a darkroom for 30 years. I suppose it is really over, long live CCD and CMOS! ;)

[bob100]

What's a "film?" :confused3


:rotfl2:

I've heard of that chemical photo stuff but never imagined people still use it!

[gokenin]

Long live analog:thumbsup2:thumbsup2 I am not really that suprised that there was no film there the digital revolution has taken complete control over what gets stocked these days. I am suprised that they had APS film however if i had know that i would have bought some I didnt think they made it anymore my point and shoot advantix camera uses that film.

[GrillMouster]

Didn't Kodak cease production of film cameras several years ago? I remember it being a big deal in the news. They still produce film and paper, but I think the only cameras they produce now are digital.

[tiggr33]

I'm headed on a Photography Road trip on Friday (and will be in WDW to shoot a few days) I'm bringing my Rebel G and a couple rolls of both Kodak400 & 100 Tmax B&W, some Fuji Provia, and some Kodak Pro BW400. I will occasionally still shoot film/slides. Even when I shot digital, I try to set up as I did when shooting film. It's a shame though, at WDW I'd expect to see atleast some sort of film.

[seashoreCM]

In a pinch you could dismantle a disposable camera to use the film inside, but I would recommend that only those with a Ph.D. in photography try it. Not all disposables actually have a 35mm or APS cartridge inside to hold the film and it is not obvious whether the film is inside the cartridge to begin with or inside the cartridge only after all the shots are taken.

It is difficult to use an assortment of differnet kinds and speeds of film unless you have several cameras because you won't have the kind of film you need in the camera at the right moment.

For those who are accustomed to shooting with film, fortunately, using the same rules for digital give the same results. There could be a systematic difference for example one camera may tend to blow out highlights necessitating an overall one stop reduction, but for all I know one particular kind of film could also be susceptible to blowing out highlights requiring the same compensation.

unfortunately it's almost all Gold 200/400, only a couple rolls of b/w, which I would much prefer.
Another situation for the photography Ph.D. and your own darkroom. Use, develop, and print a roll of color film as if it were black and white, although some special maneuvers are needed. The first stage of the development of color film yields a black and white negative image of the same kind (silver related chemicals) as on black and white film.

[MarkBarbieri]

What's next? No LPs? No slide rules? Is digital taking over everything?

[boBQuincy]

What's next? No LPs? No slide rules? Is digital taking over everything?

You are too late, the movement to "Stop Digital Madness" finally gave up in the late 80's. We could bring it back! ;)
http://stereophile.com/interviews/sheffield_steel_doug_sax/

http://stereophile.com/images/archivesart/99saxibt.jpg
photo copyright Stereophile magazine

[scoot241]

What's next? No LPs? No slide rules? Is digital taking over everything?

LPs are actually making a little bit of a comeback. ;)

[MarkBarbieri]

You are too late, the movement to "Stop Digital Madness" finally gave up in the late 80's. We could bring it back! ;)


Well I'm not giving up my slide rule. Math was never intended to be digital. If it was, irrational numbers wouldn't outnumber rational numbers.

[WVDisGeek]

Slightly OT...

Digital must be taking over everywhere (Or I am getting too old, which I refuse to face...)

While cleaning out our offices last week, I ran into some columnar pads. I can remember when I first started in public accounting, that is how we did everything. One of the younger folks in the office had never even seen them before and had no idea what they were.... (Sorry, this probably only makes sense to the accountants on the Boards, but seemed semi-relevant...:rotfl:)

Still, it seems somehow wrong that in a photography rich location semi-sponsored by Kodak that NO film would be stocked....:confused3

[stargazer214]

I think I have to agree now, perhaps film industry is really dead. In our place, some photo studio are giving special offers in selling the films.. geeez. I couldn't even remember the last time I was able to hold a negative. Everything seems to be digital as of now.

[littleangie]

i am a photography student in college. Our teacher only teached using B&W film. we have to buy 4 rolls of film for each assignment we do. We can buy film at our bookstore on campus. Originally the film was $6 a roll and over the semester is went to 50% off now. I prefer to shoot with film then digital. So i hope film makes a comeback soon.

[YesDear]

I must be old!

I remember when you went to SAM's, Costco, BJ's, whatever and they had stacks and stacks of Kodak film in really competitive price packages! Of course they were next to the blank VHS tapes!!:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

[Groucho]

Another situation for the photography Ph.D. and your own darkroom. Use, develop, and print a roll of color film as if it were black and white, although some special maneuvers are needed. The first stage of the development of color film yields a black and white negative image of the same kind (silver related chemicals) as on black and white film.
Yes, but you won't get the expanded dynamic range of true b/w film, as I understand it.

As for LPs, I bought two players off Craigslist last year and put one right in my main living room and another in my son's room. He thinks they are fascinating! It doesn't hurt that we already had a big pile of kid's albums (including many Disney soundtracks) from my childhood.

[WDWAurora]

I'm shocked they had APS. I had read that NOBODY was making that anymore-and Kodak was one of the first to stop. I thought fuji was the holdout still making it, but had stopped in the past few years. I have difficulty getting some of my APS negatives scanned (can't find all the pictures to do it myself) because so few stores process the film.

[J3nn78]

Yes, but you won't get the expanded dynamic range of true b/w film, as I understand it.

As for LPs, I bought two players off Craigslist last year and put one right in my main living room and another in my son's room. He thinks they are fascinating! It doesn't hurt that we already had a big pile of kid's albums (including many Disney soundtracks) from my childhood.

I ran a few dynamic range tests in college a few years ago between TriX100, triX400, a Nikon D200, and a Fuji S3 (at the time was a dynamic range king of digital). As of about 3 years ago, Film had a dynamic range advantage at low ISO and was at a disadvantage to digital from ISO 800 and on (really, just pushed development 400 film). I should see if I can dig my paper out of the file cabinet with the results.

My gut tells me that If I redid the test today (no access to spectrophotometer anymore though to measure a neg), I bet the Nikon D3 kicks any B&W film's butt in dynamic range, grain/noise at any ISO in every way/shape/form. Oh and it's color!

Film is going away because it is inferior for 99.95% of photographic uses other than nostalgia. 8x10 sheet film might be the last bastion of film in commercial use and that's going away quickly that digital view camera backs are not so rediculous price anymore.

I don't miss it.

[Groucho]

I ran a few dynamic range tests in college a few years ago between TriX100, triX400, a Nikon D200, and a Fuji S3 (at the time was a dynamic range king of digital). As of about 3 years ago, Film had a dynamic range advantage at low ISO and was at a disadvantage to digital from ISO 800 and on (really, just pushed development 400 film). I should see if I can dig my paper out of the file cabinet with the results.

My gut tells me that If I redid the test today (no access to spectrophotometer anymore though to measure a neg), I bet the Nikon D3 kicks any B&W film's butt in dynamic range, grain/noise at any ISO in every way/shape/form. Oh and it's color!

Film is going away because it is inferior for 99.95% of photographic uses other than nostalgia. 8x10 sheet film might be the last bastion of film in commercial use and that's going away quickly that digital view camera backs are not so rediculous price anymore.

I don't miss it.
Well, there's a couple points here. First - the grain is not necessarily a negative for me when it comes to film. I'm not looking to get film photos that look like digital. Considering the amount of film work the OP has been doing despite his D700, I'm not the only one who feels this way. ;)

Second - I'm also not so convinced on dynamic range. Most tests seem to indicate that color negative film has a range of about 10-12 stops, with b/w film more like 14 stops. (They also seem to have smoother transitions.) If you are to believe DP Review (which I don't always :) ), the D3 has about 8.5 stops of range... with over a step extra to recover from, but still not at the level of better color film and a long ways from b/w film. The Fuji S5 is still the king, with 11.8 stops at maximum dynamic range correction.

[manning]

Didn't Kodak cease production of film cameras several years ago? I remember it being a big deal in the news. They still produce film and paper, but I think the only cameras they produce now are digital.

They also recently stopped production of kodachrome.

[manning]

What's next? No LPs? No slide rules? Is digital taking over everything?

Actually LPs are making a come back.

Whoops old news, didn't see previous post.

[Groucho]

Oh, and Kodak does still make disposable film cameras (http://store.kodak.com/store/ekconsus/en_US/list/Single_Use_Cameras/categoryID.28889900), but I think that's it.

Many years ago (somewhere around 1990 or so), I had a summer job assembling Kodak Fling cameras in a tiny factory. There wasn't much to them (as you would expect), just a few bins of plastic parts including the tiny plastic lens. We just snapped 'em together and they went somewhere else to have the film loaded.

[J3nn78]

Well, there's a couple points here. First - the grain is not necessarily a negative for me when it comes to film. I'm not looking to get film photos that look like digital. Considering the amount of film work the OP has been doing despite his D700, I'm not the only one who feels this way. ;)

Second - I'm also not so convinced on dynamic range. Most tests seem to indicate that color negative film has a range of about 10-12 stops, with b/w film more like 14 stops. (They also seem to have smoother transitions.) If you are to believe DP Review (which I don't always :) ), the D3 has about 8.5 stops of range... with over a step extra to recover from, but still not at the level of better color film and a long ways from b/w film. The Fuji S5 is still the king, with 11.8 stops at maximum dynamic range correction.

DPreview tested their D3 at 8.5stops shooting JPG's with standard contrast and saturation settings. Shooting raw, there is a WAY WAY more than 1 stop of highlight detail that can be pulled out with some careful lightroom adjustments. It has saved my butt on more than one wedding dress I can tell you.

But even if it was exactly matched 11 stops of color film to 11 stops of D3 digital nef file: Digital still has so many other advantages:

ISO changes on the fly. Frame rate is faster and reliable. White balance is not set to the film. Contrast is adjustable on individual image vs having to push/pull a whole roll at a time while developing. Not to mention we are talking a modern D3 body with focusing systems beyond anything you can get to stick film in.

I'm just saying for all practical purposes, D3 > 35MM. There is only one single possible advantage to film, dynamic range, and that is honestly debatable since there's really no way to 100% correlate negative density measurement to 0-255 brightness range.

But we are so far OT it isn't funny. To the average disney world guest who couldn't give a rats behind about 11 vs 10.5 stops of theoretical dynamic range even if you could sit them down for a half hour to explain it (after explaining what shutter speed and a "stop" is): All they care about is digital is FREE and film costs $.

Just for fun though, Im going to really try and find the test data and see what I found. I'm interested now.

[Groucho]

I don't think you're getting it. :)

If you're a wedding photographer, paparazzi, newspaper reporter, etc - then sure, throw all your film equipment in the trash.

Us amateurs, whose goal is more to have fun that to just produce the final image as efficiently as possible, look upon some of the negatives as positives.

We know that digital can "beat" film in most technical ways but film and film cameras (be they SLRs, rangefinders, ultraminis, "toys", medium/large format, whatever) offer something different. Maybe it's the look of the film, maybe it's the handling of the device, maybe it's just the old-fashioned fun of manually focusing a hand-crafted metal lens, maybe it's even the action of winding the film... but it offers something on an emotional level that digital does not. They are different.

For me, it's the camera as much as anything... I have no interest in a modern film SLR; I don't want one that has autofocus and Program mode and other features of my digital SLR.

Oh, and film still debatably has an edge in absolute resolution... and if you talk medium or large format, it easily beats most digital.

[J3nn78]

I don't think you're getting it. :)

If you're a wedding photographer, paparazzi, newspaper reporter, etc - then sure, throw all your film equipment in the trash.

Us amateurs, whose goal is more to have fun that to just produce the final image as efficiently as possible, look upon some of the negatives as positives.

We know that digital can "beat" film in most technical ways but film and film cameras (be they SLRs, rangefinders, ultraminis, "toys", medium/large format, whatever) offer something different. Maybe it's the look of the film, maybe it's the handling of the device, maybe it's just the old-fashioned fun of manually focusing a hand-crafted metal lens, maybe it's even the action of winding the film... but it offers something on an emotional level that digital does not. They are different.

For me, it's the camera as much as anything... I have no interest in a modern film SLR; I don't want one that has autofocus and Program mode and other features of my digital SLR.

Oh, and film still debatably has an edge in absolute resolution... and if you talk medium or large format, it easily beats most digital.

I can agree with most of that. I can agree with the reasoning that some people prefer film is the feel, nostalgia, and experience of doing it that way. I mentioned that in my first post I think. No problems there.

Heck, I drive/race a goofy 91 mitsubishi 4dr car (Galant VR4). It's technically inferior to the new lancer evolution in every way. But it's cheaper, easier to deal with in self tuning, and I have a "history" with these engines must like older photographer have with film. I do it this way because I like it. But I can't really make much arguement that I wouldn't go faster in a 2005 Evo with the same mods. But I have alot of fun at the dragstrip doing it my way and smoking people in a car most people would assume runs 16's (it went 10.80 @ 131 last weekend, that's faster than pretty much any production street car)

But the days of both professionals earning their living from pushing a shutter button and the average consumer using 35mm are done. Complete non-enthusiast consumers don't care to buy/reload/process film anymore. Mom & Dad are sick of paying $12 for 21 junk prints to get the 3 good 4x6"'s they want. P&S digital cameras being $100 or so for the last few years maybe reduced WDW's 35mm film sales so low they just assume sell mickey pencils in the same retail spot.

Working professionals don't care about experience (I don't nor can't). The tool that works best is what I use. Changing out rolls of 35mm while the bride is walking down the isle:rolleyes: Carrying 4 bodies around all the time.:rolleyes1

That leaves the enthusiast who wants to do it his way just because. And that's great IMHO, as I said, Im the same way with my cars. Actually, Im even possibly the same way with WDW photos, as Im considering ditching my D90 travel camera and getting one of those goofy rangefinder style P*S cameras: Panasonic LX3, Canon S90, or maybe the micro 4/3rds stuff (mostly so I could use the fisheye 8mm oly lens). I'm willing to give up power/performance in nearly every area in order to make it fit in my pocket vs hang from my neck on vacation. Guess you can look at that in the same light?


EDIT:
Oh yeah, one thing we missed in our minor dynamic range debate: it's very dependent on ISO. At 200 film and D3/S5 might be film's game. Maybe at 400 too. Go push some ISO800 film 3 stops to ISO6400 and see the results. Then push it 4stops to 12,800 and you get a neg that is junk. Unfortunately, you can't buy ASA3200 to 6400 color film to even compare with a digital body, the only way to compare is an extreme push and did you remember to underexpose the other 23 frames on the roll to support a 3stop push to 6400? If my memory serves me, that was my ultimate finding, that while film did have a slight range advantage at it's rated ISO, the ability to go way higher ISO on digital with more DR in color on an individual file was practically superior.

[Groucho]

Oh sure, no argument there - at higher ISOs, film starts losing the battle pretty quickly with modern digital equipment. You won't find many people trying to get on-ride Peter Pan shots with their film camera! (Unless maybe you're using an F0.95 Leica lens maybe...)

The ability to change ISO on the fly is great but one could compare that to primes vs zooms (you can guess which I prefer!) Granted, primes have many other advantages, but part of using them is being locked into a specific "setting" and getting the most out of it.

And I get the car reference. The Galant VR4s are pretty cool (a local team just ran the One Lap of America last year in one)... my garage has an '08 STI and a '66 Lotus Elan so I can certainly appreciate most sides of that world too. :) Modern rally car and vintage sports car, totally different but I wouldn't want to trade either one for anything else.

The nice thing about photography is that you can easily combine the two... I often shoot with very old lenses, a few of which are about 50 years old. You can post-process all you want but you'd have a hard time getting the same "look" as you do with a different lens.

Gdad, hope you don't mind that your thread has been totally and shamelessly hijacked! :lmao:

[DisneySuiteFreak]

Long live analog! The other day I was talking to a 23 year old guy about music and I mentioned something that I used to listen to on cassette and he asked me, "What's a cassette?" :faint: :rotfl: I said, "Oh hell no, don't even go there! You know what a cassette tape is, right?" :confused3 He shook his head. I said, "How old are you?!" :scared1: Yikes. My 20yo DS knows what cassettes are because we still have them, in addition to my DHs LP and CD collection. LPs are on the way back sort of. There are entire stores that sell them as "vintage" records where I live. Yikes. And I still have and use my 8 hour VHS tapes to tape tv shows because it's so easy to use and reuse, and who cares about the quality of a tv show? I also have a couple of DVD recorders too, but they don't record as long as my 8 hour tapes. :laughing: but :sad: at the same time...Time marches on...

[Gdad]

Gdad, hope you don't mind that your thread has been totally and shamelessly hijacked! :lmao:

Haha- not at all. I am enjoying the little debate.


Well, there's a couple points here. First - the grain is not necessarily a negative for me when it comes to film. I'm not looking to get film photos that look like digital. Considering the amount of film work the OP has been doing despite his D700, I'm not the only one who feels this way. ;)

I agree with this- I am not looking to get digital looking film shots either. I love digital photography too so don't get me wrong.


Second - I'm also not so convinced on dynamic range. Most tests seem to indicate that color negative film has a range of about 10-12 stops, with b/w film more like 14 stops. (They also seem to have smoother transitions.) If you are to believe DP Review (which I don't always :) ), the D3 has about 8.5 stops of range... with over a step extra to recover from, but still not at the level of better color film and a long ways from b/w film. The Fuji S5 is still the king, with 11.8 stops at maximum dynamic range correction.

I don't shoot film to try to achieve anything with dynamic range that I think can't be done with digital.

Farther down the OT Road but having had both I will say there is nothing on earth the S5 can do that the D3/D700 can't do better- way better. IMHO the Fuji S5 is a decent camera but the hype on it's superior colors and dynamic range are just that- hype. Maybe for a jpg shooter there is some advantage in the way the camera processes the files but I saw no real world benefit over the D300 which I was using at the same time with raw files.


If you're a wedding photographer, paparazzi, newspaper reporter, etc - then sure, throw all your film equipment in the trash.

Us amateurs, whose goal is more to have fun that to just produce the final image as efficiently as possible, look upon some of the negatives as positives.

We know that digital can "beat" film in most technical ways but film and film cameras (be they SLRs, rangefinders, ultraminis, "toys", medium/large format, whatever) offer something different. Maybe it's the look of the film, maybe it's the handling of the device, maybe it's just the old-fashioned fun of manually focusing a hand-crafted metal lens, maybe it's even the action of winding the film... but it offers something on an emotional level that digital does not. They are different.

For me, it's the camera as much as anything... I have no interest in a modern film SLR; I don't want one that has autofocus and Program mode and other features of my digital SLR.

I agree with this. The film cameras I use regularly include a Leica M6- Nikon FE- Hasselblad 500cm- and a Yachica 124G TLR- plus a few others which are older- or Russian knock-offs- or plastic. Out of the group though none of them can auto-focus, all of them have prime lenses- some of them have a meter- some don't- they all have a personality. I like to take just one with me- and one lens- and one film type (hence the issue that began this thread) and see what I come back with. But I tend to do that with digital to some extent too- usually running with just one prime lens anyway. I find a certain sense of accomplishment with capturing a set of images on film with a classic camera and waiting to see what comes off the reel after I develop it. I don't need 200 'keepers' of my kids every weekend- if I land a couple good shots- get to munty on a well made vintage camera- and play with chemistry that's what I call a good weekend. :thumbsup2


I can agree with the reasoning that some people prefer film is the feel, nostalgia, and experience of doing it that way. I mentioned that in my first post I think. No problems there.

But the days of both professionals earning their living from pushing a shutter button and the average consumer using 35mm are done. Complete non-enthusiast consumers don't care to buy/reload/process film anymore. Mom & Dad are sick of paying $12 for 21 junk prints to get the 3 good 4x6"'s they want. P&S digital cameras being $100 or so for the last few years maybe reduced WDW's 35mm film sales so low they just assume sell mickey pencils in the same retail spot.

Working professionals don't care about experience (I don't nor can't). The tool that works best is what I use. Changing out rolls of 35mm while the bride is walking down the isle:rolleyes: Carrying 4 bodies around all the time.:rolleyes1

For Working Professionals- Absolutely- If I made some or all of my living from photography then I would want what would make my work the easiest and most productive. The appropriate tools would be obvious- a top end digital camera and set of professional zoom lenses to cover any shooting scenario. No argument there.


That leaves the enthusiast who wants to do it his way just because. And that's great IMHO

The problem as I understand it is that the manufacturing process of photographic film- particularly 35mm- is not really conducive to small run production. In other words it is only cost effective for manufacturers to make lots of film- and when the steadily declining demand for it hits a breaking point then mass production will cease. That leaves behind the enthusiast who wants to do it his way- just because.

Still no excuse for Disney to not have film at the Kodak Camera Center on Main Street today though. ;)

[J3nn78]

And I get the car reference. The Galant VR4s are pretty cool (a local team just ran the One Lap of America last year in one)... my garage has an '08 STI and a '66 Lotus Elan so I can certainly appreciate most sides of that world too. :) Modern rally car and vintage sports car, totally different but I wouldn't want to trade either one for anything else.

Gdad, hope you don't mind that your thread has been totally and shamelessly hijacked! :lmao:

I was just up in Rochester at Tim's house (the One Lap GVR4 guy) a couple weeks ago, I bought his old streetcar GVR4 for parts. My GVR4 is all setup for drag racing, it's pretty useless as a rally car and it's a maginal street car. 560hp, 4 bias ply hoosier drag slicks, welded differentials, and open 3.5" downpipe kind of kill it for backroad cruising.:cool2:

And yeah, I'v hijacked this thread now X3! :sad2: sorry

[J3nn78]

The problem as I understand it is that the manufacturing process of photographic film- particularly 35mm- is not really conducive to small run production. In other words it is only cost effective for manufacturers to make lots of film- and when the steadily declining demand for it hits a breaking point then mass production will cease. That leaves behind the enthusiast who wants to do it his way- just because.

Still no excuse for Disney to not have film at the Kodak Camera Center on Main Street today though. ;)

I agree it just seems odd that with Kodak sponsoring pretty much everything photographic related at WDW, they would still be selling film, even if it was at twice the normal retail price and had mickey ears on the wrapper/box. And it's not like they have changed the camera center into an "all digital" photography store, as the last time I was in there it was more general souvenir merchandise than anything camera related. Mostly picture frames and generic albums.

[ThurlFan]

Long live analog! The other day I was talking to a 23 year old guy about music and I mentioned something that I used to listen to on cassette and he asked me, "What's a cassette?" :faint: :rotfl: I said, "Oh hell no, don't even go there! You know what a cassette tape is, right?" :confused3 He shook his head. I said, "How old are you?!" :scared1: Yikes. My 20yo DS knows what cassettes are because we still have them, in addition to my DHs LP and CD collection. LPs are on the way back sort of. There are entire stores that sell them as "vintage" records where I live. Yikes. And I still have and use my 8 hour VHS tapes to tape tv shows because it's so easy to use and reuse, and who cares about the quality of a tv show? I also have a couple of DVD recorders too, but they don't record as long as my 8 hour tapes. :laughing: but :sad: at the same time...Time marches on...

I still remember going down to the store with my dad and running a bagful of vacuum tubes through the tube tester to see which one had gone bad...;)

[MassFamily]

We bought a Nikon N65 when we got married, just before digital P&S were getting less expensive and greater mp. I can't justify dropping another $400 on a DSLR because I don't get enough chances to take pictures. I am going to dust it off and take some pics during our trip, going for the castle and fireworks are my main goal.

Do we need a thread for film tips and suggestions?

[Gdad]

Sure- I do.

Tip #1 is take all the film you need along with you. It's hard to find at Disney and when you do find some it's ridiculously expensive.

As for fireworks- I would think most of the same advise applies as with digital cameras. I know there are a couple good fireworks threads on here somewhere.

[MassFamily]

Thanks Jeff, that is a good tip, now I just need to find fresh film around here. I hope Ritz has not gone totally digital.

[d_lairson]

I still shoot a lot of film, mostly 120 B&W c-41 though. I think that there is something about film that I just have not been able to capture with my DSLR. It could be that I don't have the settings right:confused3

As for finding film at WDW, it is almost impossible and very expensive, so take twice as much film as you think you might need and save the leftovers for other projects.

[Gdad]

http://www.freestylephoto.biz/index.php

Excellent selection, prices and service.

[Gdad]

Here is the Fireworks thread: http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=1474329

(OT but why can Google find this but the DIS search tool can't?)

[annnewjerz]

(OT but why can Google find this but the DIS search tool can't?)

I could find it with the DIS search tool, you just have to know the exact name of the thread...."How to Shoot: Fireworks." ;)

To the OP, I shot with film while in Disney this past year and had a great time. I use a Digital SLR, but brought a Holga with 120 film just to have some fun and try it out in a more fun setting than my home town in New Jersey. I agree with everyone else that you should bring more film than you anticipate needing (sort of like memory cards) because as usual, everything costs more in Disney and depending on what type of film you are shooting (or possibly any film at all), it might not be available while you are down there if you run out.

Good luck and have fun!

[Groucho]

So we spent a couple days and stayed over at Disney last weekend. I decided to go light and just take one camera which happened to be 35mm. Anyway- I took 10 rolls of Tri-X 400 speed film along which is B&W but when I got to the Magic Kingdom on Saturday and saw all the Christmas decorations I thought it would be nice to shoot a few rolls of color. So I wandered into the 'Camera Center' on Main Street- sponsored by 'Kodak' by the way- and was pretty surprised to find they had absolutely no 35mm film for sale whatsoever. Nothing at all aside from a little display of disposable film cameras and a few boxes of APS film (eh?) to offer. I know most people don't care but I can't imagine many places where more pictures are being taken every day than Disney World. Seems like it wouldn't kill them to keep a little bit of it around just in case. :confused3
Just to bump an old thread... on our most recent trip from a few weeks ago, I saw 35mm film (not just disposable cameras) for sale all over WDW - it was probably in the majority of shops we looked at, and certainly was everywhere that they were selling disposables.

I'm not sure if there was a temporary shortage or what, I just wanted to make sure everyone knew that the rumors of film's death at WDW are premature. :thumbsup2

[funkychunkymonkey]

Well I'm not giving up my slide rule. Math was never intended to be digital. If it was, irrational numbers wouldn't outnumber rational numbers.

I should know this I bet but whats a slide rule? im not kidding I dont know.

[YesDear]

I should know this I bet but whats a slide rule? im not kidding I dont know.


I am feeling soooo old!

Slide rule (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slide_rule)

When I was a freshman in college the HP pocket calculator had just come out. It did addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division. It had an LED screen and cost $279.00. It was rechargeable. That year was 1973. The big argument was it going to replace the slide rule!

[funkychunkymonkey]

I am feeling soooo old!

Slide rule (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slide_rule)

When I was a freshman in college the HP pocket calculator had just come out. It did addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division. It had an LED screen and cost $279.00. It was rechargeable. That year was 1973. The big argument was it going to replace the slide rule!

thank goodness for calculators! this looks SOOOOOOO confusing. I have admit I was born in 84.

[d_lairson]

When I was working as a Network Administrator I would keep an old slide rule on my desk, and if people would complain about how slow the network was or what ever I would had it to them and tell them to use my "Back up computer". I used to be faster with my slide rule than a calculator, but not any more...

[pjacobi]

The APS film format was hated with a passion by professional protographers. It was never fully accepted by amateurs, despite all the support for Kodak.

Yet, APS format still lives today! How?

The sensors in most dSLRs are the same size as the APS format film. Canon's sensors are sized exactly to APS-C and APS-H format. Nikon's DX sensor is just slightly larger, but still very close to APS film format.

The 35mm film for still cameras was just an accident, too. The format was a simple way to recycle film leaders from 35mm movie cameras.


-Paul

[disneyboy2003]

When I was working as a Network Administrator I would keep an old slide rule on my desk, and if people would complain about how slow the network was or what ever I would had it to them and tell them to use my "Back up computer". I used to be faster with my slide rule than a calculator, but not any more...

There are quite a few small-business folks in Taiwan who STILL use an abacus, and I was SHOCKED to see how lightning fast their fingers were! :scared1:

If you don't know what an abacus is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abacus

If you've never seen an abacus before:

http://thescienceexperts.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/abacus.jpg

[funkychunkymonkey]

we have a abcus in our classrooms! our kids love them.

As far as ASP film its a pain in the you know to get devoloped. I cant find anyplace but the camera shop to get the roll I found in the camera bag I bought, cant wait to see whats on the roll (and its black and white!!!)

[ukcatfan]

My wife and I remember when changing the channel required standing up!

[ukcatfan]

My wife and I remember when changing the channel required standing up!

Per my wife: "I was the original remote control!!!"

[funkychunkymonkey]

My wife and I remember when changing the channel required standing up!

Still does in my house, wherre the univeral remote wont work with my acient tv!

[AlbertZeroK]

I got given an old CANON EOS ELAN body. Yep, 35mm film. So, I though, I remember shooting with film (and an AE1), but never anything this fancy. So I've just gotta to buy some film!

Does anyone here still shoot film? I'm curious where you get it developed, especially looking for high quality negative scanning. Is Fuji and Kodak still number one in the film world?

[Groucho]

I still shoot film occasionally, though rarely. I just shot a couple rolls of 110 actually, in my new-to-me Pentax Auto 110 SLR. I'm going to shoot my sister-in-law's wedding in a couple months and am planning to pick up some b/w film to go along with the digital.

Dwayne's Photo is, I think, the only place left that processes 110, and they are big in the 35mm world, too. Negative scanning is not too hard to find but quite expensive. I know that Dwayne's offers a CD with your prints (I had some 35mm done, too), but I didn't do it as I already have a Nikon Coolscan.

For what film... well, I don't think about it much. Living in Rochester, Kodak is pretty much a given. :) I also happen to have a TON of it lying around from a few years ago when a relative worked on a project for them that required a lot of packaged film to test, and I got a bunch of it, so I think I'm set on basic Kodak Gold for life!

[photo_chick]

Groucho.. is it just me, or is that little Pentax 110 the neatest toy ever? My dad gave me mine back when I was in junior high. I love that little camera.

I do shoot film and still have a working darkroom, so I normally process my own film. I don't make a lot of prints these days, I just scan the negatives.

My latest obsession is my Kodak Brownie.

As far as what kind... I'm partial to Kodak. Even though it's getting really hard to find what I want around here. Like Trix 320. I miss that stuff.

[Gdad]

I still shoot a fair amount of film- both 35mm and 120. I develop my own B&W- for Color C41 I use Sam's Club I think they charge around $2 a roll for either format just to do the negatives- for E6 slides I use Dwayne's- and I do all my own scanning. For any film or supplies I highly recommend Freestyle.

http://www.freestylephoto.biz/

[Chikabowa]

I've been shooting film on a Nikon F100 all summer. Just for fun. :)

[Altair]

There may never be a better medium to record photographic images on than Kodachrome.:thumbsup2

[Andrew Bichard]

There may never be a better medium to record photographic images on than Kodachrome.:thumbsup2

Kodachrome
They give us those nice bright colors
They give us the greens of summers
Makes you think all the world's a sunny day, Oh yeah
I got a Nikon camera
I love to take a photograph
So mama don't take my Kodachrome away

Andrew

[Experiment_626]

I haven't shot film since around 2002, but I still have a Nikon film SLR rattling around the house in case the mood ever strikes.

[wingawh]

I have moved towards shooting film roughly half the time. Primarily a Holga 120N and a Lomo LC-A+ which is a 35mm.

I use B&H for my film and Richard Photo Lab for processing.

There is something amazing about getting the film back from the lab to see bat you captured.

Looking forward to shooting a good bit of film next month in WDW.

[Chikabowa]

There is something amazing about getting the film back from the lab to see bat you captured.


Oh I couldn't agree with you more!!
I just went back to shooting film back in June to to vary up what I was doing and to stretch myself creatively.
I found myself falling in love with photography, in a whole new way, all over again. There was just something so tangible about film, loading it, feeling the film advance in the camera, waiting for the prints, being so very careful that every composition and exposure is perfect.
Just love love love shooting with it again. :)

[Groucho]

Groucho.. is it just me, or is that little Pentax 110 the neatest toy ever? My dad gave me mine back when I was in junior high. I love that little camera.
:) Me too! I first played with one when buying something else from someone off Craigslist and he mentioned that he had one. I just had to buy one after that! I did the "self portrait in mirror" with it but I can't find the photo right now. I still need to scan the rest of the photos in. The quality certainly isn't there compared to 35mm, but it's not terrible and the little thing is just a joy from a purely mechanical sense! And nothing like having a lens cap the size of a nickel! It's a little jewel.

A year or so ago, Pentax released a PnS that was physically a clone of the Auto 110, called the "i10" - sort of cute. :)

[photo_chick]

There is something amazing about getting the film back from the lab to see bat you captured.



My favorite part of film is when I'm processing and I finally get to open the tank and pull it off the reel to see if I got anything good.

[onnawufei]

There is something amazing about getting the film back from the lab to see bat you captured. Oh yes, definitely! DH doesn't understand it in the least but I'm the artistic one so I'm not really surprised.

I'm bringing my Mini Diana to Disney for (hopefully) some good lomo shots. I recently bought a bunch of film from Four Corner Store so I won't run out while I'm there. Not that that's usually an issue with the Mini Diana. It shoots square pictures or half frame pictures, and if you use the half frame it doubles your roll of film. It can take forever to get through that many pictures!

[wingawh]

Glad to hear another bringing a loom to the parks. I shoot the Lomo LC-A all the time and have gotten many great pics at WDW.

[gokenin]

this slideshow was posted on another site that I go to and I thought of this thread. I dont know but I find it funny that in Japan the home of almost all our digital cameras that you find a store like this. check out pictures 4-14 i think they are and you will see film is indeed not dead but it may be on lifesupport here in the states I am afraid.

http://www.photoness.de/yodo_analog/